arhyalon

The Alt-Left (a.k.a. SJW, SJZ, Social Justice Warriors, Social Justice Zealots, Social Justice Zombies, and crybullies) do not believe in free speech. tolerating people who disapprove of their ideas, or that the races should be treated equally. (They just convinced the University of California to offer race segregated housing. Poor Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr. must be spinning in his grave. Perhaps this is a secret plan to create an perpetual motion machine by attaching a generator to the unfortunate reverend and his fellow Civil Rights leaders.)

They are the Alt-Left, because they are entirely a different group from the Left:

The Left are Liberals, i.e. people who are, well, liberal. They believe in freedom, free speech, toleration, treating everyone equally, regardless of race. They are open-minded, so much so that whatever you tell them, they will response:

“Nothing you can say will offend me.”

This is directly opposed to the Alt-Left, who even take offense at kindly meant comments, such as “Excuse me, sir,” or God bless you."

I should add: The reasons I like this term are three-fold:

1) It makes it clear that the two groups mentioned above are separate groups.

2) It is not complementary. Come on. If you didn't know what it meant, who would not want to be a Social Justice Warrior! It sounds like a superhero. I know people who have signed on and call themselves SJWs who are nothing like what other people mean by the term.

3) And, most important to me, it is not insulting. Unlike terms like crybabies and the new Ctl-Left (as in Ctl-Left, Alt-Right, Delete), it doesn't insult the people who hold these believes. I might not agree with them, but I don't like insulting a person just for holding a belief. Also, a person might hold such believes and not themselves be a crybully. I am often annoyed that there isn't a term for referring to these ideas that isn't insulting.

Alt-left is the instability strip of politics. People who actually call themselves alt-left tend to be third way authoritarians at its most extreme, embracing the alt-right's tech fetishism and their problems with race. There are maybe a literal ton of them in existence.

You're thinking of "regressive left," which is a term I feel actually fits democrats who embrace right-wing social positions or those who have embraced fascist or quasi-fascist or otherwise right wing authoritarians because there aren't any more authoritarian leftists in power and I am forever resentful that they stole what ought to be our word for people like them.

Everything I've seen, on Snopes and elsewhere, tells me this is no different from similar housing that existed on my own campus 20 years ago, and was never otherwise. If you have another source, though, please provide it.

I guess we'll just have to see. My impression was that they were defining it as similar, but that, in practice, it was catering to those who believe the current ideas that one race can upset another race due to factors that are outside of their control (ie. "privilege."-a thing they can't curb, change, or modify. )

But since one can't really tell anything by the news nowadays...

Ever since last year, when every single news article about my husband and his friends was wrong...and had not bothered to contact them for the real facts, I have lived in acceptance of the fact that I may really not know what is going on.

On the other hand, insulting people who believe, just for starters, that one should shoot children in the head because their parents are insufficiently counter-revolutionary, (Che Guevera) strikes me as a FINE idea.